The Changing Role of Gene-Expression Profiling in the Era of De-escalating Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: We assessed the recent trends in the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy thereby evaluating the role of the 70-gene signature (70-GS) testing in decision-making in the systemic treatment of patients with lymph node negative (N0) and lymph node positive (N+) breast cancer. METHODS: Patients with a national guideline directed indication for 70-GS use treated between 2013 and 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Time trends in the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy were evaluated within guideline- and age-delineated subgroups. The influence of the 70-GS on chemotherapy use was assessed with logistic regression. RESULTS: During the study period, the overall administration of adjuvant chemotherapy decreased from 49 to 23% and 70-GS use increased from 24 to 51%. The 70-GS was not associated with a decreased likelihood for N0 patients to receive chemotherapy (odds ratio [OR] 1.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-1.17), as the proportion of N0 patients who received chemotherapy in the absence of 70-GS use decreased during the study period. In patients with N1a disease, 70-GS testing was associated with a decreased likelihood to receive chemotherapy (OR 0.21; 95% CI 0.15-0.29). In patients < 50 years and 50-59 years of age, 70-GS use was associated with a consistent lower proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy throughout the study period (OR 0.17; 95% CI 0.13-0.23 and OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.43-0.65, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study, the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy in ER+ breast cancer strongly declined. For node-positive and younger patients, 70-GS use was associated with a decreased probability for patients to receive adjuvant chemotherapy.

The influence of socioeconomic status and ethnicity on adjuvant systemic treatment guideline adherence for early-stage breast cancer in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess whether socioeconomic status (SES) and ethnicity affect adjuvant systemic therapy (AST) guideline adherence in early breast cancer patients in a health care setting with assumed equal access to care. METHODS: Data from all female patients surgically treated for primary unifocal early breast cancer between January 2005 and December 2014 were retrieved from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. We assessed the association between SES, ethnicity and non-adherence to adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) or endocrine therapy (ET) guideline indications with Poisson regression models, adjusting for clinicopathological variables. RESULTS: A total of 104 201 patients were included in the current analysis. Of patients without an indication, 4% and 13% received adjuvant CT or ET (overtreatment), whereas 39% and 14% of patients with an indication did not receive CT or ET (undertreatment). Medium and low SES patients were 1.01 (95% CI 1.00-1.01) and 1.01 (95% CI 1.00-1.01) times more likely to be undertreated and 0.85 (95% CI 0.76-0.94) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.60-0.75) times more likely to be overtreated with CT compared with high SES patients [resulting in an overall relative risk of CT use of 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.96) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.83-0.87), respectively]. No association between SES and ET guideline adherence or ethnicity and CT/ET guideline adherence was observed. CONCLUSION: In the Netherlands, minimal SES disparities in CT guideline adherence were observed: low SES patients are less likely be overtreated and marginally more likely to be undertreated with CT resulting in an overall decreased risk of receiving CT. No ethnical disparities in AST guideline adherence were observed.

Changes over time in the impact of gene-expression profiles on the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy in estrogen receptor positive early stage breast cancer patients: A nationwide study.

Ten years ago gene-expression profiles were introduced to aid adjuvant chemotherapy decision making in breast cancer. Since then subsequent national guidelines gradually expanded the indication area for adjuvant chemotherapy. In this nation-wide study the evolution of the proportion of patients with estrogen-receptor positive (ER+) tumors receiving adjuvant chemotherapy in relation to gene-expression profile use in patient groups that became newly eligible for chemotherapy according to national guideline changes over time is assessed. Data on all surgically treated early breast cancer patients diagnosed between 2004-2006 and 2012-2014 were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. ER+/Her2- patients with tumor-characteristics making them eligible for gene-expression testing in both cohorts and a discordant chemotherapy recommendation over time (2004 guideline not recommending and 2012 guideline recommending chemotherapy) were identified. We identified 3,864 patients eligible for gene-expression profile use during both periods. Gene-expression profiles were deployed in 5% and 35% of the patients in the respective periods. In both periods the majority of patients was assigned to a low genomic risk-profile (67% and 69%, respectively) and high adherence rates to the test result were observed (86% and 91%, respectively). Without deploying a gene-expression profile 8% and 52% (p <0.001) of the respective cohorts received chemotherapy while 21% and 28% of these patients received chemotherapy when a gene-expression profile was used (p 0.191). In conclusion, in ER+/Her2- early stage breast cancer patients gene-expression profile use was associated with a consistent proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy despite an adjusted guideline-based recommendation to administer chemotherapy.

Adjuvant systemic therapy in early breast cancer: impact of guideline changes and clinicopathological factors associated with nonadherence at a nation-wide level.

Over recent years, adjuvant systemic treatment guidelines (AST) for early-stage breast cancer have changed considerably. We aimed to assess the impact of these guideline changes on the administration of AST in early-stage breast cancer patients and to what extent these guidelines are adhered to at a nation-wide level. We used Netherlands Cancer Registry data to describe trends in AST prescription, adherence to AST guidelines, and to identify clinicopathological determinants of nonadherence. Between 1990 and 2012, 231,648 Dutch patients were diagnosed with early breast cancer, of whom 124,472 received AST. Adjuvant endocrine treatment (ET) use increased from 23 % of patients (1990) to 56 % (2012), and chemotherapy from 11 to 44 %. In 2009-2012, 8 % of patients received ET and 3 % received chemotherapy without guideline indication. Conversely, 10-29 % of patients did not receive ET and chemotherapy, respectively, despite a guideline indication. Unfavorable clinicopathological characteristics generally decreased the chance of undertreatment and increased the chance for overtreatment. Remarkable was the increased chance of ET undertreatment in younger women (RR < 35 vs 60-69 years 1.79; 95 % CI 1.30-2.47) and in women with HER2+ disease (RR 1.64; 95 % CI 1.46-1.85). Over the years, AST guidelines expanded resulting in much more Dutch early breast cancer patients receiving AST. In the majority of cases, AST administration was guideline concordant, but the high frequency of chemotherapy undertreatment in some subgroups suggests limited AST guideline support in these patients.

Using a gene expression signature when controversy exists regarding the indication for adjuvant systemic treatment reduces the proportion of patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy: a nationwide study.

PURPOSE: The Dutch national guideline advises use of gene-expression signatures, such as the 70-gene signature (70-GS), in case of ambivalence regarding the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT). In this nationwide study, the impact of 70-GS use on the administration of CT in early breast cancer patients with a dubious indication for CT is assessed. METHODS: Patients within a national guideline directed indication area for 70-GS use who were surgically treated between November 2011 and April 2013 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry database. The effect of 70-GS use on the administration of CT was evaluated in guideline- and age-delineated subgroups addressing potential effect of bias by linear mixed-effect modeling and instrumental variable (IV) analyses. RESULTS: A total of 2,043 patients within the indicated area for 70-GS use were included, of whom 298 received a 70-GS. Without use of the 70-GS, 45% of patients received CT. The 70-GS use was associated with a 9.5% decrease in CT administration (95% confidence interval (CI): -15.7 to -3.3%) in linear mixed-effect model analyses and IV analyses showed similar results (-9.9%; 95% CI: -19.3 to -0.4). CONCLUSION: In patients in whom the Dutch national guidelines suggest the use of a gene-expression profile, 70-GS use is associated with a 10% decrease in the administration of adjuvant CT.Genet Med 18 7, 720-726.Genetics in Medicine (2016); 18 7, 720-726. doi:10.1038/gim.2015.152.

Impact of gene-expression profiling in patients with early breast cancer when applied outside the guideline directed indication area.

PURPOSE: In Dutch guidelines, gene expression profiles (GEP) are indicated in estrogen receptor positive early breast cancer patients in whom benefit of chemotherapy (CT) is uncertain based on traditional prognostic factors alone. Aim of the present study is to assess the use and impact of GEP on administration of adjuvant CT in breast cancer patients who have according to national guidelines a clear indication to either use or withhold adjuvant chemotherapy (clinical high or low risk). METHODS: Clinical low- and high-risk patients, according to Dutch breast cancer guidelines, diagnosed between 2011 and 2014 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Influence of GEP use and GEP test result on CT administration was assessed with logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 26,425 patients were identified; 4.8% of patients with clinical low risk (444/9354), 7.5% of the patients with a clinical high risk (1281/17,071) received a GEP. GEP use was associated with significantly increased odds of CT administration in clinical low-risk patients (OR = 2.12 95% CI: 1.44-3.11). In clinical high-risk patients, GEP use was associated with a decreased frequency of CT administration (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.48-0.63). Adherence to the GEP result was higher in clinical high-risk patients with a discordant GEP result as compared to clinical low-risk patients with a discordant GEP result: 71.7% vs. 52.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: GEP is frequently used outside the indicated area and significantly influenced the administration of adjuvant CT, although adherence to the test result was limited.

Characterisation of multifocal breast cancer using the 70-gene signature in clinical low-risk patients enrolled in the EORTC 10041/BIG 03-04 MINDACT trial.

BACKGROUND: In multifocal breast cancer, guidelines recommend basing adjuvant systemic treatment decisions on characteristics of the largest lesion, disregarding multifocality as an independent prognosticator. We assessed the association between multifocal disease and both the 70-gene signature (70-GS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in clinical low-risk breast cancer patients enrolled in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10041/BIG 03-04 Microarray In Node-negative and 1 to 3 positive lymph node Disease may Avoid ChemoTherapy (MINDACT) trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The analysed population consisted of enrolled patients in the MINDACT trial with clinical low-risk disease, defined by a modified Adjuvant! Online cut-off for the 10-year risk of recurrent disease or death. Eligibility criteria of MINDACT dictate that patients with multifocal disease could be included if the different lesions had similar pathological characteristics. The presence of multifocal disease was deducted from the case report form (CRF)-question for sum of diameter for all invasive tumour foci. Clinicopathological characteristics and gene expression of patients with unifocal and multifocal (largest lesion) disease were compared. Subsequently, the association between multifocal disease and the 70-GS was evaluated as well as the association between multifocality and 5-year DMFS. RESULTS: The study included 3090 clinical low-risk patients with unifocal and 238 patients with multifocal disease. Apart from a higher prevalence of lobular tumours (21.8% versus 10.8%, by local pathology), we did not observe differences in baseline characteristics between multifocal and unifocal tumours. Patients with multifocal tumours were more likely to be at high genomic risk as compared to patients with unifocal tumours (22.7% versus 17.3%, odds ratio [OR] 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.07, P = 0.038). We did not find a significant association between tumour focality and DMFS (97.1% for unifocal versus 96.9% for multifocal, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.55, 95% CI 0.68-3.46, P = 0.172), nor a signal for a potential interaction between the prognostic effect of the 70-GS and focality of the tumour regarding DMFS. CONCLUSION: In the group of clinical low-risk MINDACT patients, multifocal tumours were more likely to have a high-risk 70-GS profile compared to unifocal tumours. We did not observe a significant interaction between multifocality and the 70-GS with respect to survival without distant metastasis in these patients.